Special Debates — COVID-19 Immigration and Border Policies—Interim Report of the Petitions Committee

Members, we now come to the debate on the interim report of the Petitions Committee related to COVID-19 immigration and border policies. I call on the Chairperson of the Petitions Committee to move that the House take note of this report.

I so move, That the House take note of the interim report of the Petitions Committee related to COVID-19 immigration and border policies.

It is a wonderful opportunity for myself as the chair of the Petitions Committee to introduce the work we have been doing which has led to this debate in the House today. In so doing, I wish to acknowledge and welcome those many people in the gallery today who are caught in an immigration system which seems not to meet their needs.

Today I want to, first of all, introduce our work, the petitions, but to focus, as will my colleagues, on the human cost of this Government’s policies on individuals, their families, and their whānau, not only for those here in New Zealand but for those who are overseas and where families find themselves, due to this Government’s policies, far, far away from their loved ones and with no apparent end in sight for that separation.

Before I outline, as the chair, the petitions which are contained in our report to the House, I just want to give a very brief anecdote of a family member of mine who was—in my wider family—separated from her new husband, who was caught in the United Kingdom, in England. My family member was here in New Zealand, and for eight months she was literally heartbroken, because they had just got married a few months before, heartbroken because there was no way to bring her husband to join her in New Zealand, even though he had the required entitlement and eligibility.

So how must it be all these months later for the many, many people both here in New Zealand and overseas who are still waiting for some movement, some recognition through our immigration system of their personal circumstances. I want to acknowledge those people—not only those who petitioned our committee but also those who are here today and wider in New Zealand and across the globe who are waiting for this Government to act.

The Petitions Committee received such a number of petitions from people, individuals who were stuck in the immigration system, that it occurred to my colleague Tim van de Molen that there would be an opportunity for the Petitions Committee to write to the Business Committee of Parliament and request a special debate. So I want to acknowledge Tim van de Molen for his foresight and his acknowledgment of the human pain that was occurring around New Zealand and wider, and for seeking a remedy that just moved this issue forward a little bit for those people. If we can do that for those people, for those people in the gallery, if we can do that through this debate, if we can move things along just a little bit, then I think that will be something that we would be very pleased to do. As chair of the committee, I’m going to run through those 12 initial petitions and the people behind them. There are more, but I will confine myself and just give a little flavour of the circumstances.

The first category I want to touch on are families who are affected by the border closure. We heard from four petitioners who want—sorry, I might just go through my notes and start there—to be able to come to New Zealand to be reunited with their families. These people include temporary visa holders, their families, and family members of New Zealanders.

Natasha James came to work in New Zealand in January 2020 as a critical health worker, but her partner and children are still overseas. Xiaosong Lan has a similar request in his petition. He wants the Government to grant border exemptions and managed isolation and quarantine spaces to all overseas partners of New Zealand citizens, resident, and temporary visa holders. Polina Chernyshova’s petition—and I do apologise if I’m not getting the pronunciation of all these names correct today; I am sorry—says, and I quote, “being separated from our families is affecting our mental health, efficiency and ability to focus on the research, the critical research we are undertaking.” Marianna Tomarelli’s petition says, “it is harder for families in non-visa-waiver countries to gain entry to New Zealand.”, and she submits to us “that the entry process should be the same from both types of country.”

We have petitions from workers and students who are currently overseas—seven petitions. Tincy Mary Philip is really “frustrated that the border is closed to students who were granted study visas before entry restrictions began,” and she “describes their financial and mental health problems as a result of not being allowed to enter.” We can see a theme coming through here. Nandita Alexander, her husband, and their toddler “were living and working in New Zealand but got stranded overseas while visiting relatives at the start of the lockdown.”, and they just want to come back. Yu Ting Mak seeks to “extend the exemptions to all migrants who still have work in New Zealand.” Mandeep Singh asks that the following people be allowed entry into New Zealand: “people with work or study visas who had been living long-term in New Zealand … offshore partners who were issued a visa to join their partner in New Zealand before the borders [were] closed.” Julie South is very concerned about a shortage of veterinarians, and I read in the media that there is now a critical shortage of veterinarians, which is applying considerable pressure on those vets who are working in New Zealand. Belen Macchiavello asks “that the Government allow migrants with current New Zealand visas who are stuck offshore to re-enter New Zealand.”

And then we had requests to extend the work visas of people already in New Zealand. Marie Louisa Bock simply wants “a plan for what will happen when working holiday visas expire at the end of June [this year].” Cait Guyette requests “temporary flexibility of visa conditions for wine industry workers so that there will be enough staff for the 2021 vintage.” I do hope, now that the vintage is complete, that there are enough workers to get on with the thinning, which is now under way. Carlos Madureira is “frustrated that the Government has paused its processing of expressions of interest for the Skilled Migrant Category”. And Artur Khasanov is frustrated about the length of time—simply the length of time—taken by Immigration New Zealand “to process Skilled Migrant Category residence applications.” He simply wants a decision.

These people simply want a decision from Immigration New Zealand, from this Government, so that they can move on with their lives. Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

Can I begin with something which is potentially out of order and acknowledge the participants in the rally this afternoon out the front of Parliament. I think, diplomatically, I received a mixed welcome, but I do want to acknowledge the fact that it was good to hear their stories on the front forecourt of Parliament, and I thank them for doing that.

When the Government did close the border over a year ago, we were very clear about our priority, and that was to protect lives. In the year before we closed the border, nearly 7 million people came across it; in the year following the closure, that number was 226,000—in other words: arrivals into New Zealand were 2 percent of what they were before the border closed. We made the decision to close the borders to everyone but New Zealand citizens and residents in order to keep COVID-19 out, keep New Zealand safe, and also to keep our economy open. It was a decision based on science and strong public health advice. And, also, that has enabled New Zealand to avoid the worst of a global pandemic. Entry to New Zealand from all countries remains strictly controlled to help prevent the spread of COVID-19. Our priority has always been to enable New Zealanders, New Zealand permanent residents, to enter New Zealand, and this has meant we have had difficult choices to make about who else can come to New Zealand within the constraints of the managed isolation and quarantine capacity that we have here in New Zealand.

The Government understands that the border closure has caused some temporary visa holders difficulties. While the border closure has meant we can keep our economy going, it has also meant the loss of customers for some sectors of the economy—like international education and the likes of tourism and hospitality—while others have faced labour shortages. It has also affected temporary migrants and their families directly, including those who were caught offshore at the time of the border closing, those migrants who are here in New Zealand but whose family members are overseas, and those who had made arrangements to move to New Zealand but have been unable to do so. At this stage, because of the pandemic outside of New Zealand and because we are just ramping up our vaccine programme, there is difficulty providing certainty of when visa holders who do not meet the current border exception criteria may be able to enter the country, and their current visa expiry remains in place. We recognise the difficulties faced by individuals and families whose plans have been disrupted or have been unable to reunite with their families. Some families have taken the tough decision to reunify in their home country because of this. This is why the Government will continue to be mindful of their situations as we open back up to the world.

While tight border restrictions continue to be a key part of the Government’s strategy to protect New Zealand against COVID-19, over the past year the Government has made an ongoing series of changes to enable more people to enter into New Zealand to support New Zealand’s recovery and unite families as we have been able to do so and as it has been safe. Under these settings, around 2,000 partners and dependent children of New Zealand - based work or student visa holders who normally live in New Zealand have been granted a border exception, and 3,000 family members of critical workers have entered to date, and we have progressively made other changes so that more families could reunite. Last month, we made changes to the border settings to enable partners and children of onshore temporary work visa holders to travel to New Zealand to be reunited—these included the partners and dependent children of temporary visa holders in New Zealand who hold visas but had not yet arrived here when the border closed, the families of healthcare workers in New Zealand, and a number of other highly skilled workers in other sectors who are currently in New Zealand. Immigration New Zealand has also resumed processing offshore relationship-based visa applications for partners of dependent children of New Zealand residents and citizens, from September 2020.

We have also made changes so that more businesses can get the skills they need. Since August, 1,300 normally resident temporary work visa holders, who had jobs, family, and homes in New Zealand, but were unable to return due to border restrictions, have returned to New Zealand as part of a border exception. The Government has extended some employer-assisted and working holiday visas so that people can continue to work for industries needing their skills, and we are currently assessing what else we can do in this space. A number of groups of workers have been provided a class exception to the border closure; the largest to date was the exception for the Recognised Seasonal Employer scheme—or RSE scheme.

The Government has been considering class border exceptions as circumstances permit, taking into account the benefits to New Zealand’s economic, social, and humanitarian objectives and the impacts on managed isolation and quarantine capacity. Further to the decisions and changes made affecting those who are offshore, we have made a number of pragmatic decisions for those migrants who are onshore, including a number of visa extensions, including for workers, visitors and working holiday makers, and making it easier for people to stay onshore in their jobs and remain lawful.

The bar for entry, while the global pandemic remains high—we have seen some managed isolation capacity free up since the creation of the trans-Tasman bubble, and we’ll consider where we can make changes to take the pressure off people and businesses. But our priority will always be maintaining the strength of the border settings that have kept COVID-19 out of our communities. This means that employers will continue to need to look primarily onshore for talent and skills, and there are existing residence pathways for those who are currently in New Zealand on temporary work visas but wanted to stay long term. The Skilled Migrant Category (SMC), in particular, may be an option for those skilled workers who will contribute to New Zealand’s long-term economic and social goals.

The Government has also signalled a review of the Skilled Migrant Category resident visa to assess whether it remains fit for purpose to meet New Zealand’s skills needs in the longer term. In the meantime, Immigration New Zealand is working on ways that it can reduce the wait times of Skilled Migrant Category residence applications, and I’m expecting to announce the restart of the SMC expression of interest soon.

The Government is also turning its mind to what a reopening of the border might look like, and I have signalled a reset of our immigration settings. How fast we reopen our borders, and to whom, are questions we don’t yet have the answers to but are considering in great detail. Steps to open the border will be taken only as and when we are able to do safely. The quarantine-less travel with Australia and the Cook Islands—as of Monday—are examples of our commitment to this.

Petitions have been submitted to this House to express people’s views on our immigration and border policy settings, and the unifying theme in all of them is people’s desire for things to return to normal—this is an understandable sentiment. As I said to the group outside this afternoon, at this stage we cannot provide absolute certainty to these people about when our border protections will be able to be relaxed. However, as I have outlined, the Government will continue to be mindful of different and difficult situations that these people are facing and finding themselves in as we look to open back up to the world.

Tēnā koe, Madam Speaker. I rise with great pain to this House to speak to the many petitions that have been presented on the issue of immigration. I want to acknowledge the people in the gallery who are joining us today who come from our migrant communities, who shared with us their pain. I want to acknowledge, as well, the Minister for being present during the time that they were sharing their stories.

The petitions that were presented, and that we’re discussing today, do not call for us to not take a public health approach. If anything, I doubt many migrants want us to have a resurgence of COVID-19. In fact, most of our migrant communities have supported the public health approach taken by the Government so that we are all safe. None the less, what the petitions are asking is for kindness and for justice, and for the rights of our migrant communities to be upheld. In fact, many of the issues raised in these petitions have to do with the rights of our onshore migrant communities who have been failed by our broken immigration system. I want to make it clear that our immigration system was already pretty broken since before the pandemic, and the pandemic has only made the policy failures worse.

I want to touch on, for example, the petition of Ryann Lourenco, who called for pathways to residency for our migrant communities, acknowledging that migrant communities who are onshore are some of the most vulnerable to a resurgence of COVID-19. When you cannot access assistance through the welfare State, when your future isn’t certain, when you cannot go to school, you are far more vulnerable to the pandemic, and the right thing to do right now is to also tautoko the contributions that our migrants have made during the pandemic and ensure that they can fully participate in society. I think it’s nothing close to gaslighting to imply that what migrants are asking is for us to open our borders to COVID-19. For our migrant communities offshore, the petitioners have asked for certainty and for clarity, simply for a pathway of knowing when they’ll come back. Some people do not mind waiting, but they just want to know that they’ll be able to be reunited with their families. Post-study work visa holders simply want to know that they’ll have a visa once the borders reopen and it is safe. They’re not asking for our lives to be put at risk; they are simply asking for there to be a pathway and for there to be certainty.

Other petitioners, like Polina Chernyshova, have asked for some equity in the ability for migrants to be reunited with their families, for post-graduate students to be able to apply for the exemptions—and they know that once they apply for the exemptions and apply for visas, they still have to wait to get access to managed isolation and quarantine. Our communities know that, and they’re OK with that, but it’s about that equity within the process. The fact that our community in India doesn’t even have that pathway to apply for the border exemptions, just because of their country of origin, is absolutely not fair, and has been also highlighted by the petitions.

The Green Party stands behind many of the calls of these petitioners. We stand for pathways to residency, we stand for the extension of visas for our communities offshore, and we call on the Government to hear the voices of these petitioners and fix our immigration system, so that our migrant communities can have some certainty that they can fully participate in society and that they can be part of our recovery from COVID-19. Because what we have seen is that the recovery from COVID-19 is not equal. There have been groups that have been left behind as we recover from the pandemic, either in our unemployment statistics or in their ability to access income support. The emergency benefit provided to our migrant communities has not been successful. It has under-delivered, and I wish that our migrant communities would be able to access residency so that if they were to move back to alert level 3 or 4, or were to lose employment, they can be fully supported and participate in our recovery.

So the Green Party hears the voices of the many petitioners. We will not stop campaigning and working productively with the Labour Party to ensure that we fix our broken immigration system. Now, the key thing here as well is that we end visa delays. This is nothing to do with our border rules. This is about the communities here who have been waiting for months—some, for years—for their visas to be processed, because our immigration system is run as a business as opposed to a core public service. We call for broad systemic changes that ensure that our migrants’ dignity is upheld. Kia ora.

I want to start by thanking those who have come into the gallery today. This debate is an opportunity for you to hear directly from the Minister of Immigration, who has the power to significantly alleviate your families’ suffering, though I imagine you are feeling very frustrated right now. I also thank the petitioners, as their efforts have led us to this debate.

The big questions are: how has Immigration New Zealand (INZ) stuffed up so badly on these issues and what is the Minister going to do about it? The first question seems to be a lack of empathy at Immigration New Zealand, an attitude problem, a policy innovation failure, poor decision-making at the application level, and the inability of officials to foresee a raft of so-called unintended consequences. One strategy that demonstrates the attitude problem is the way in which visa extensions have been granted under the powers. They are last-minute, which, as far as I can tell, is some sort of device to force migrants to have to give up and leave the country. It is highly cynical and unfair. Another good example was very recently when INZ was told off by the Ombudsman for allocating Skilled Migrant Category (SMC) applications unfairly based on informal policy.

A number of petitions focus on the state of the Skilled Migrant Category, and, fair enough, it is a total disaster. INZ has brought the processing of the Skilled Migrant Category to a standstill, which is supposed to be their flagship visa for attracting and retaining the skills that we desperately need in New Zealand. It pales in comparison to the schemes they have in other countries. Not only has the Skilled Migrant Category stalled, with absurdly long processing times, but INZ has shot themselves in the foot, yet again, by having an expression of interest (EOI) queue that is still open for submissions but they’re not drawing on it. It’s now over 9,000, we hear today—unbelievable.

I think the Minister should have an honest conversation about the Skilled Migrant Category, because, in reality, there is no real residency system in this country any more. We’re telling people that we want them to commit their lives and skills here, but the walls are closing in on many pathways. So my answer to the issues raised by the petitioners on the SMC and the EOI selections is that INZ should wipe the slate clean and offer an efficient transitional pathway to residency for all temporary visa holders stuck in those queues.

Petitions also seek travel exemptions for partners and children of temporary visa holders. I agree with this; it’s well overdue. And while he’s at it, the Minister should address the impossibly stupid “fetch your partner” requirements, forcing people to leave New Zealand, go into areas with many active cases of COVID-19, and then return here with their partner, which increases the border risk and utilises resources at managed isolation and quarantine facilities. It’s just insanely stupid. What’s happening in reality is that people are being stranded overseas for a variety of legitimate reasons, which, again, I’m guessing is actually the real objective here: they want them gone.

Keeping families apart, including very young children, is a shameful practice that INZ should have resolved long ago. I know that members receive correspondence about the terrible situations that migrants are in and the lack of compassion that INZ has shown towards them. One example is a highly skilled clinical psychologist, who got in touch with me very recently. She is employed in a Government agency that deals with very difficult cases. Her husband has been stranded overseas for longer than a year without possessions or family there, unable to return to New Zealand. She’s now at a point where she’s about to walk away from New Zealand. I can assure this House that the agency that employs her will find it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to fill her role if she leaves. All they need is a simple border exemption.

One petition addresses international students. Again, I agree with this. Existing students, or, at least, those who have valid visas in 2020, should be given the chance to return to New Zealand. They are in enormous debt, and many of them are still paying bills and rent here, for God’s sake.

I’ve also received many complaints about decision making at the case officer level. This is where things just get ridiculous—countless examples of getting basic policy and immigration directions wrong, which is why something like 50 percent of the applications to the Immigration and Protection Tribunal are successful. Anyone can go on to the Justice website on a weekly basis and read about the latest mistakes, daft mistakes, that have been made.

The problems raised in these petitions run deep at INZ, but are not unsolvable. So we have to ask ourselves: how do we want to act as a country, what do we owe the people in the gallery here today and outside Parliament, and, finally, how are we going to repair the damage that has been done to our international reputation as an ideal destination for work and study?

There’s actually another petition that is currently open on the parliamentary website, entitled “Remove the Hon Kris Faafoi as immigration Minister”. [Applause from gallery]

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): Order! Order!

And in the words of the late Margaret Thatcher in her final appearance as Prime Minister, “What a good idea!”

Tēnā koe, Madam Speaker. I rise in light of the fact that the Māori Party’s chosen not to speak on this matter, but simply, really, to affirm the comments of the Minister that these are very difficult times, and they are situations in which families have been separated, and it’s important that we recognise that. But these are times in which we must put the health of New Zealanders first, and that has led to some very difficult decisions. But the Minister has made some very difficult decisions, and the result of that is a New Zealand where we are safe and the economy remains strong, and I absolutely stand behind the decisions of the Minister in that regard. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise to take a call on this matter. It would be really hard for anyone not to be moved by the many stories that we do hear from our migrant communities, and, especially, just a couple of hours ago when we heard from so many on the forecourt of Parliament. We heard many, many moving stories. But I was proud to stand with our Minister of Immigration, and I know it was appreciated that he was there at the rally and that he was listening to everyone’s concerns.

As the Minister already said in his speech, the strategy our Government developed to eliminate COVID-19 from our communities and to keep New Zealanders safe meant that we had to take that unprecedented action of closing our borders. As the Minister said in his speech, that meant making difficult choices. These were tough decisions. The only people at the time being able to enter New Zealand were citizens, residents, their partners and children, and others who had been given an exception to the border closure. Tight border restrictions were then, and are now, a key part of the Government strategy to protect New Zealand against COVID. Our closed border is the first and best defence in keeping COVID out of our communities. This is a very careful approach we had to take.

We have been able to reunite families, support key industries, restart our refugee settlement, and keep our critical public services running during what was, and is, a global pandemic. You only need to look internationally to see how different countries responded to the pandemic and how much New Zealand stands out. But I do acknowledge that this has had a large impact on many people, causing difficulties for families trying to reunite, for our offshore non-resident partners of New Zealand citizens and permanent residents, for workers and students stuck overseas, and others, as is evident from the many petitions we have received and from the many stories that we heard from you and you shared with us also today. The consequences of the actions taken to keep New Zealand safe, the decision to close the borders and to protect New Zealand communities from COVID-19, caused real difficulty and heartache for people. But there is a lot of work being done to get people into New Zealand and through managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ), as well as the many thousands of border exceptions that are being worked through.

Over the past year, several border exceptions supporting the reunification of split families have been introduced as circumstances allowed. Work on those new border exceptions is continuing. We’ve heard from the Minister that around 13,000 family members of New Zealand citizens and residents have been granted border exceptions. A border exception was established for partners and dependent children of New Zealand -based work or student visa holders who normally live in New Zealand, and that was around 2,000 who have been granted an exception. Critical workers who are entering New Zealand through a border exception are able to have their family accompany them. More than 2,500 members of critical workers have been able to enter to date.

In August last year, the Government approved a new exception category that was targeted at those temporary work visa holders who had jobs, families, and homes in New Zealand but were unable to return back due to those border restrictions put in place. This has enabled, to date, 1,300 temporary visa holders and their families who normally live here and were overseas when the borders closed to return to New Zealand. To date, 135,000 residents and citizens have returned to New Zealand and gone through the MIQ system, with approximately 10 percent of those coming through the exceptions.

And the work continues. It was only on 19 April that our Government announced changes to border settings to enable partners and children of temporary work visa holders who are currently working and residing in New Zealand to travel to New Zealand to be reunited. So while these latest border exceptions can’t help every migrant family caught in last year’s border closures, the Government will continue to review options across a range of border entry demands.

We had a very successful response to COVID-19 in New Zealand, and sometimes it’s easy to forget that while our domestic situation has increased and improved since the borders closed, there is still a worldwide pandemic raging, which is infecting and killing large numbers of people. We are not immune to what happens around the world, and we have seen that last year very much. But we absolutely acknowledge—and we heard from many of you today that there will still be people having difficulties because of those borders. But as the Minister said in his speech, a review of border exceptions will continue and further adjustments will be made as and when they are possible so we can safely open up again to the world.

This is an issue we need to debate. It would be great if we could take the politics out of it and actually show you that we care for you, our migrant families. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would like to start by acknowledging the people in the gallery who came here today. Can I acknowledge the speaker who just sat down—the chair of the committee that the Labour MPs sat on that rejected your calls for an inquiry into split migrant families and into effects on migrants of the border closures.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): I remind the member not to bring me into her speech.

You would—sorry. Those members in the gallery wouldn’t need to be here today if we had that inquiry. They would have been able to come to the select committee and tell us about their struggles. That was the vehicle. They didn’t need to be here today, but here we are, back again, having to go through the same steps, day after day.

Iresha Wijetunga went on the news last night, crying over the children she hasn’t seen in a year, because she’s a construction worker—watching 300 more construction workers come in with their families over the next six months. It’s the migrant nurse anomaly all over again. The member who just took her seat talks about the achievements of this Government in reuniting split migrant families. Well, that announcement a month ago, as I expected it would be, was a very small proportion of the total of those migrant families. They lauded it as some wonderful policy—that they’d done their job. But, in fact, most of those migrant families are still sitting, waiting for a road map for reunification for their families. They continue to wait.

We have been calling on this Government for months and months for a road map for reunification for every single split migrant family so that they have some light at the end of the tunnel. As my other colleagues on this side of the House have said, no one has said that they want to see their family tomorrow. They all understand that there will be delays. They just want to know that it will happen. There are 1,800 rooms right now in managed isolation and quarantine—and have been for the last few weeks—empty. We could have reunited 1,700 split migrant families in the last two weeks, and we did nothing. That is atrocious.

Why are we here? We are here because there were so many petitions that were lodged about this broken immigration system that we had to have our very first special debate triggered by this new Petitions Committee on immigration. We have it because we’ve got a Minister who spent the good part of a year failing to act to reunite split migrant families; Labour MPs shutting down a select committee inquiry; and a Government who, through their own policy settings, have caused the longest residency queue in our nation’s history. That started well before COVID ever hit.

We have highly skilled migrants who are sitting in a queue that, at best, will take two years for them and at worst is going absolutely nowhere and is completely frozen. If their children turn 18, they can’t work, they can’t study—they can’t even go out and volunteer at their local hospital, otherwise they won’t be dependent and they won’t get residency with their family’s application. We have been calling on the Government to at least let those children study. Some of them are going back and doing year 13 again. Can anyone in this House imagine how bad that is for the mental health of a young person? There is no fair-minded Kiwi in this nation that thinks it’s OK to leave an 18-year-old to rot for two, three, four years, wasting their potential because of the residency queues caused by poor Government policy.

These skilled migrants are highly stressed, highly anxious. They’re living in limbo, with no certainty, no surety that the country they moved to and made their home, the country that they work hard for, will still be their home at the end of what is a traumatic immigration experience. While it’s terrible for those migrants who are sitting up there in the gallery, it’s terrible for us, because we need them here. They are our teachers. They are our nurses. They are our doctors, our IT workers. We need them here.

I just want to finish by saying that on the weekend was Mother’s Day, and I didn’t post about Mother’s Day because I couldn’t. The day before Mother’s Day, on Saturday, I went to Christchurch. I did a public meeting and I spoke to women afterwards who stood there crying with me—at me—because they hadn’t seen their children in a year. How could I, in good conscience, post about Mother’s Day and how wonderful it is to be with my children, when these women haven’t seen their children in a year because of this Government’s utter incompetence? It is not good enough, and they have to do something about it.

Order! Can I please remind all of the people in the gallery—most of you may be here for the first time—we have a Speaker’s ruling that contributions from the gallery, including clapping, is only allowed with the Speaker’s permission prior to being in the gallery.

I rise to take this short call on this very pressing issue. I just heard Erica and other MPs from the other side of the House just shouting and shouting. We’ve heard a lot of emotional pleas. A few years ago, when the world was having the worst ever refugee crisis—71 million displaced refugees—we rallied and rallied and rallied and cried. I was one of the people who rallied to the steps of Parliament, talking and pleading to the Government to increase the quota by a few hundred. Guess what? None of them even came out and addressed us.

But in saying that, I’m not saying this to take away from the migrant issues. Today, we have heard from migrants, from the speakers and from families who have been separated, and the stories are heartbreaking. No one can deny that—no one can dispute that. But I just want to say anyone in doubt of this Government’s commitment towards migrants’ and refugees’ plights and issues is utterly wrong, because the track record speaks for itself. My colleagues and myself in our select committee, every day we discuss this with our Minister, who is actually working hard to make a difference, to change things.

In March 2020, we needed to go into the lockdown—hard lockdown—with one thing in mind: that we were just saving lives; nothing more, nothing less. Because of those measures and steps, we are today living like humans. The fact that my brothers and sisters from migrant communities can come and that the protests and sit-downs are here today is because of those steps and decisions that we made. Last year this time, March 2020, the number of infections and deaths all over the world was about a few hundred thousand; a year on today, as of today, 160 million infections, 3.3 million deaths. Just in the last 24 hours, 742,000 infections and 13,500 deaths. We all know that the actual number is higher than this; it’s just a lot of countries don’t have proper testing kits. This is the sombre reality of this virus. It’s still out there. It’s killing people; it’s infecting people.

The measures that we have taken are the only thing that’s keeping us safe and also keeping our health system from being overwhelmed—and that is our borders. This is how, at the end of the day, there is the light at the end of the tunnel. We have seen the Minister speaking about opening to refugees, reuniting families. As we speak today, in the next few months, there are going to be about 750 to 1,000 refugees who will be coming to this country. Since March 2020, no single refugee came into this country. Some of them—a lot of them, actually—being accepted by New Zealand are in war zones—women, vulnerable children. But the reality with this virus meant that none of those people could come to this country.

I’ve heard from the speakers talking about how they are unappreciated, they are unliked—that no one wants them in this country, that this Government doesn’t want them in this country. I just want to tell you that’s not true. You are loved, you are valued, you are appreciated. You are a big part of our recovery plan that we are setting out. Please, please don’t listen to people there who are politicising this issue. This is not about politics. These are real people’s lives. We should not play with their emotions. We should not play with their hearts. These are real lives, real people. I will just leave it there, Madam Speaker, and thank you.

Greg O’Connor says that members of this side are using the people in the gallery.

💬 Greg O’Connor: And another one stands up to do the same thing.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): Order! Let’s let Chris Bishop give his speech, please.

He says we’re using the people in this gallery who have come to Parliament twice now—

💬 Greg O’Connor: Yes, you are.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): Can I remind the member not to bring me into the debate.

People have turned up to this Parliament twice now in good faith to ask for the Government to have a heart and do the right thing and sort out their immigration status—an immigration status that, through no fault of their own, because of the impact of COVID-19, has been negatively affected. I want to pay tribute to those in the gallery. We in the Opposition, led by Erica Stanford, our immigration spokesperson—

💬 Greg O’Connor: Are leveraging this to the maximum degree.

You might just want to reflect on your behaviour, Greg. There are people watching in the gallery and on TV, and I don’t think they’ll be very impressed by it. We are doing the right thing and representing those who have come to Parliament and asked the Government for action.

💬 Greg O’Connor: Playing politics.

Well, the thing about immigration—and this was going to be my next point—the thing about Parliament is it’s political. It’s an amazing thing. We’re all elected here. We’re sent here to Parliament to do a job. Let’s be very clear: immigration is political. It’s political because Government policy is decided by politicians. It’s Government policy to not act on split migrant families. That makes it political. Managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ) resourcing is political because it’s the Government that decides how many beds are available in MIQ and how they’ll be allocated. Just yesterday, we had the Minister announcing that we’re going to have Recognised Seasonal Employer scheme workers coming in, construction workers coming in. We welcome that on this side of the House, but the failure to act on the split migrants is political. Immigration funding is political because it’s the Government that decides how much money goes to the immigration department, and that decides how many immigration staff there are, and that decides how quickly they process residence applications. That’s why we have, as Miss Stanford pointed out, the longest backlog in New Zealand history. That’s political. That’s what Parliament is for. That’s why we’re having this debate. It’s to interrogate those issues. That’s the whole point of a democracy. So that is, of course, why immigration policy and actions are political, and that’s, of course, why we are interested in it. Marja Lubeck says, “Let’s not politicise this.” Immigration policy is political. Miss Stanford is doing the right thing.

There are very few things that you come across in Parliament that I think are indefensible, but the situation with the split migrant families that has been brought to the House’s attention through these petitions and through the protests on the forecourt today and in the past is indefensible. Cameron Conradie moved here in good faith as a teacher at Hutt Valley High School, in the Hutt, teaching maths. He moved here in good faith; he was paid to come here. The Government incentivised him to move to New Zealand, and he did so in good faith. He came here in January 2020, and his family were to follow. The story has been told on a few occasions. They packed up their belongings, they liquidated their assets, and then COVID happened. And no one’s saying that that wasn’t unfortunate and that there didn’t have to be a response. But in May 2021, he is saying—and we agree, and a lot of people agree with us—“Let’s reunite my family.” And he looks at the MIQ numbers—1,800 beds available last week on average each night—and says, “I have moved to New Zealand, I want my family to come. Why can they not come?” And there are no excuses from the Government—there are no excuses, and the Government has not been able to point to any. And it is completely unreasonable. Our position and the position of Mr Conradie and the split migrants who are here in the gallery and on the forecourt is: either allow us to come to New Zealand and reunite our families or, at the very least, let’s have a road map. And from the Minister today in his speech and at the forecourt, we didn’t even get that. It is political, but it’s also indefensible. That’s why we’re having the debate and that’s why the gallery is full.

I firstly want to acknowledge those in the gallery. I just want to acknowledge your participation, in good faith, in our democratic processes, with not only bringing petitions to this House but, despite what my fellow member of the select committee says, we have actually heard many of your heartbreaking stories, because you have brought them to select committee. We heard you. We saw you. So we have had the opportunity to receive your participation, in good faith, in that democratic process. I just need to note the hard work that continues to happen.

The range of petitions that have been brought to this House—clear evidence that the impact of border closures is not just hard but incredibly complex. I just want to reflect at this moment on the impact that the border closures have had on our rural communities. It is clear that our primary industries, our rural communities, have carried our economy through COVID-19, and the significant challenges and pressures that border closures have placed on our rural communities have been reflected in at least two of our petitions.

As you go through the petitions, you think about how the situations have changed and evolved and how border settings that have adjusted in response to the issues that have been very bravely raised have been significant. Changes to immigration settings have happened, and they continue to happen. New opportunities to revise settings continue to arise. Decisions have been made to extend visas, vary visa conditions, and waive some application requirements across entire visa categories. Some work visas were extended to allow workers to stay and remain in current roles to help maximise the available onshore workforce when the border closed. The most recent extension was made in December for workers with visas expiring from 1 January to 30 June. We hear about decisions being made at the last minute—but better to be nimble than not be able to make a decision at all.

Where there has been additional capacity in managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ), we have been able to let limited numbers of people through: extending 7,800 working holiday visas and easing conditions to allow holders to work in industries like horticulture, to take some of the burden off of our rural communities who want to make sure that they can continue with their livelihoods; provide an exemption for about 5,500 Recognised Seasonal Employers—recognised seasonal workers—and that’s a recognition of the value that we place on those workers. They are highly skilled and incredibly vital to bring that harvest in—for example, in Blenheim.

The trans-Tasman bubble has freed up more rooms and it has allowed us to allocate more places in managed isolation—for example, for critical workers. We’re able to bring them in to support the economy. The New Zealand Winegrowers association was really pleased because workers will arrive in time for winter pruning, a skilled role in which they excel, and it will benefit the workers, their families, and our rural communities. This additional labour supply is absolutely necessary to meet seasonal peak demands, and it will set the industry up. It gives them some certainty as they go through their annual preparations for next year’s harvest, the pruning.

So this is just one example of how, just like with the petitions, the issues are raised. And when it is possible to respond and still keep all of us who are here safe, we do so.

COVID risks keep shifting. MIQ capacities keep changing, but you have heard, on the forecourt, in select committee, and here in this House that there is a clear commitment to continue to adjust immigration settings, for not just economic reasons but humanitarian ones as well.

Motion agreed to.

Interim report noted.